But what I'm not hearing is any follow-through. Nothing about shrinking government. Nothing about finding ways to work under budget. Nothing about lowering the deficit. Nothing about decreasing spending.

How can a party in full control, bragging not too long ago about permanent majorities, not manage to get anything done for the American people?

Logical

05-05-2006, 10:46 AM

That sir is the 3 Trillion dollar question. (and growing).

BucEyedPea

05-05-2006, 11:31 AM

Great question. Great thread.

Amnorix

05-05-2006, 12:31 PM

My favorite is that Bush promised to reduce the deficit (or debt?) as a percentage of GDP, by half by the end of his term. Ya, right...

Frankly, Mr. Harvard Business School is running the worst managed government of our time...

My favorite is that Bush promised to reduce the deficit (or debt?) as a percentage of GDP, by half by the end of his term. Ya, right...

Frankly, Mr. Harvard Business School is running the worst managed government of our time...

Who cares? I heard some Kennedy wrapped his car around a pole!

jAZ

05-05-2006, 05:07 PM

Who cares? I heard some Kennedy wrapped his car around a pole!
I guess Rush Limbaugh was grandstanding with moral indignation about that today. Can you believe it?

ROFL

patteeu

05-05-2006, 07:30 PM

I guess Rush Limbaugh was grandstanding with moral indignation about that today. Can you believe it?

ROFL

Limbaugh was completely nonjudgemental about Kennedy's admitted impaired driving situation. He was critical of

a) those around Kennedy who he accused of being more interested in covering up and minimizing the problems Kennedy keeps having (presumably for political gain) instead of "helping him with the problem he obviously has." (paraphrased)

and

b) the unequal treatment that Kennedy got relative to what happened to Cynthia McKinney and expressing sympathy with what she must be thinking right now.

I think today was a good refutation of memyselfi's charge of a couple days ago that Limbaugh is hypocritical on this subject. Not only did he not condemn a person for drug/alcohol abuse or call for a "harsh penalty" but he avoided doing so even though that person was an obvious political adversary of his.

Ugly Duck

05-06-2006, 11:28 AM

Limbaugh was completely nonjudgemental about Kennedy's admitted impaired driving situation. After getting caught with his hand so deep in the Hillybilly Heroin jar, even Rush Lamebaugh is smart enough not to continue smaking others for the same thing. The hypocrisy was smacking on others while flying high until he got caught. Its no longer hypocrisy on Rush's part because he's been outed.

hypocisy: The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess

patteeu

05-06-2006, 08:16 PM

After getting caught with his hand so deep in the Hillybilly Heroin jar, even Rush Lamebaugh is smart enough not to continue smaking others for the same thing. The hypocrisy was smacking on others while flying high until he got caught. Its no longer hypocrisy on Rush's part because he's been outed.

hypocisy: The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess

The other day, memyselfi posted a couple of quotes of Rush saying something to the effect of "drug abusers should go to jail," but those quotes came from 1995. I asked her if those were the most recent ones she could find and she didn't produce any more recent. Are you aware of any? That was something like 8 years before he announced his addiction and entered rehab. AFAIK, he has never indicated exactly when his addiction started, but unless you have evidence that it started before those 1995 statements (or any more recent statements you know about), it's pure speculation that he ever made a hypocritical statement on this subject. IMO, it's at least as likely that his own personal battle with addiction impacted his thinking and led to an actual change of position on the matter and a dearth of public statements condemning drug abuse consistent with that new position.

Pitt Gorilla

05-06-2006, 08:56 PM

Of course he doesn't want to raise taxes; his party just wants to spend the money.

Taco John

05-06-2006, 10:06 PM

The other day, memyselfi posted a couple of quotes of Rush saying something to the effect of "drug abusers should go to jail," but those quotes came from 1995. I asked her if those were the most recent ones she could find and she didn't produce any more recent. Are you aware of any? That was something like 8 years before he announced his addiction and entered rehab. AFAIK, he has never indicated exactly when his addiction started, but unless you have evidence that it started before those 1995 statements (or any more recent statements you know about), it's pure speculation that he ever made a hypocritical statement on this subject. IMO, it's at least as likely that his own personal battle with addiction impacted his thinking and led to an actual change of position on the matter and a dearth of public statements condemning drug abuse consistent with that new position.

ROFL

I love how Bush apologists never allow conservatives to be judged by thier own words from ten year ago... But find a John Kerry quote from the 70's, and they'll force him to choke on it until he bleeds...

Your apologist schtick is getting waaaaay old, dude...

patteeu

05-06-2006, 11:30 PM

ROFL

I love how Bush apologists never allow conservatives to be judged by thier own words from ten year ago... But find a John Kerry quote from the 70's, and they'll force him to choke on it until he bleeds...

Your apologist schtick is getting waaaaay old, dude...

I'm pretty certain you've never seen me quote John Kerry from the 70's at all and even more certain you've never seen me do it for purposes of "proving" he was a hypocrite.

Taco John

05-07-2006, 12:04 AM

I'm pretty sure I never saw you do your apologist act against the people who were using 10 year old quotes against Kerry either.

It's interesting that Rush is allowed to backtrack on his earlier statements without having to be held accountable for them at all. What was the problem there? Were Rush's original statements simply not principled statements? Or did he change his mind after realizing the weakness of the human condition? I wonder how far down the slope Rush is willing to slide with his new found respect for human weakness... Just to the point where he has weakness?

patteeu

05-07-2006, 07:59 AM

I'm pretty sure I never saw you do your apologist act against the people who were using 10 year old quotes against Kerry either.

LOL, Like that somehow justifies your earlier conflation of me with those who do. I'm pretty sure that I'm not the only person around here who doesn't fight every injustice or weigh in on every controversy. If you think Kerry needs someone advocating on his behalf, you take care of it.

It's interesting that Rush is allowed to backtrack on his earlier statements without having to be held accountable for them at all. What was the problem there? Were Rush's original statements simply not principled statements? Or did he change his mind after realizing the weakness of the human condition? I wonder how far down the slope Rush is willing to slide with his new found respect for human weakness... Just to the point where he has weakness?

As I already said in this thread, my money is on a change of mind, but we can't know for sure, we can only look at the evidence and make informed judgements. IMO, the judgement that he's a hypocrite on this subject is a possibility but not as likely as that he changed his mind.

How far down the slope does your respect for human weakness go? I bet Rush isn't much different in that regard than you or me.